In what years was it title or bust for Uconn

[NielsisGood]

Emeka's back acted up in the BET and Ben was not a model of consistency until he stepped it up during the BET.

Great team, but you're right, not a "title or bust" team entering the NCAA.

I'd still say that was a title or bust team given what happened in 03 and expectations coming into the season.

 

[NielsisGood]

Man, WTF happened in 2011-12. That year was so inexcusable with the talent we had, geez.
It's one thing if we had a good year and lost in the Elite 8 or whatever but that team never even had it close to putting it together...

Team was extremely young, had just lost Kemba, and had a logjam in the interior.

 

[blackbird]

04, 06, 09

I went into Shabazz' senior season believing we'd win though.

 

[champs99and04]

Team was extremely young, had just lost Kemba, and had a logjam in the interior.

They might have been young, but they were Kentucky young. NBA prospects across the roster, four starters returning from a championship team, HOF coach. It was almost a case of having too many guys - if we had only seven players or so and guys got steady playing time and could settle into their roles, things would have gone much smoother. Chemistry would have been better and development would not have been impeded.

It was the one UConn team I can remember that just wasn't into it. It looked like they didn't play hard at times and I rarely say that.

In hindsight, though, what a wasted opportunity. We essentially won a championship with 2012's B team. To not at least be in the mix that year was a huge failure.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Weren't the chicks and the dudes both on the cover of SI's college basketball issue as pre-season favorites in '04?

 

[ASweet3781]

I think the only 3 years that really qualify are 99, 04, and 06.

1995 and 1996 were more of a Final Four or bust year. 2009 people were still unsure of those players in the preseason because they had yet to win a postseason game.

2011 and 2014 obviously were unexpected treats. Same with 1990 and 2002.

 

[huskyniner]

My senior year, 2009, was definitely title or bust for me. I still thought we'd win it all even after losing Dyson.

 

[Mr. French]

2004 was weird ... they were #1 for 5 weeks out of the year (11 games). Lost to Carolina on the road mid-season, had an inexplicable loss to Providence at home and then stumbled a bit on the back end of the schedule (I seem to remember a couple nagging injuries) before winning the BET and entering the tournament ranked #7 (2-seed).

But in hindsight, the way they dismantled the field (with the exception of that Duke game) was astounding. You could put '04 up against
'95, '99 and '06 as the best team in UConn's history but I don't think they were "title or bust" entering the tournament.

I think you're right on about everything except the expectations. Similar to 06 but there we didn't seal the deal, we went into the season thinking "we're the best team and odds on favorite" or, in other words, title or bust.

They played a bit inconsistent, had some injuries, and maybe entering the tournament they weren't what they were preseason, as far as "expected" ... But as a UConn fan, my feeling and my remembering of the general sentiment was that despite a up and down year, they were the most dangerous, most likely team to win if they play their peak and with peak health.

In fact, part of the reason for that, imo, was that Duke was the only other team that REALLY seemed capable of beating that team, and despite the inconsistency and #2 seed, they were the most feared and the best when full strength.

Just chiming in on my memory of that year, I felt the most confident about them winning it that season, I'd say probably tied with 06 for any season going into it and throughout.

 

[Mr. French]

I think the only 3 years that really qualify are 99, 04, and 06.

1995 and 1996 were more of a Final Four or bust year. 2009 people were still unsure of those players in the preseason because they had yet to win a postseason game.

2011 and 2014 obviously were unexpected treats. Same with 1990 and 2002.

I think that's pretty accurate, though I remember definitely feeling some of that in 96, with how 95 went and how loaded we were all year, I felt great about that team. But you probably are right that strictly going on "title or bust" going into and then thru the season, 99, 04 and 06 are the only definites.

 

[Mr. French]

I didn't think it was possible to achieve 'championship or bust' until the team actually won the NC before, which is why I wouldn't include 1999. I think that year was Final Four/Championship Game or bust.

For me, I think it's just 2004 and 2006.

I remember quite vividly after the Syracuse/Kansas final and they had Vitale in the booth and asked him who was the favorite to win the following year and he picked Uconn, so there was definitely some media talk about the 2004 team. I know we didn't know yet how good Boone was going to be or that Rashad was going to be such a lethal weapon, but I remember being really high on Marcus White and that team almost got to the Elite Eight against a good Texas team.

I think 2006 is really the only year though- mainly because that had some lottery picks, had players who had 'been there', but mostly because it was so close to 2004- the expectations were so high that anything else was going to taste like Colon Blow.

That's actually a good point. I thought 95-96 and 98-99 obv we could/should/possibly would, but it never happened yet.

In that vein, you could say 04/06 are the only true ones, with 09 actually being close behind.

I love some of those teams, what memories of some great ball.

Edit: Didn't mean to post 3 straight, sorry. Technical error.

 

[Ewekon]

2011-12 was one of two First Nights I have attended. Drummond was introduced to the UConn nation by attempting 2 ridiculous - more than full court - high lob passes to himself in an attempt to dunk at the far end. Both failed. They had brought the lights down. Crowd was nuts. Oriakhi hated him (imho) from that moment on and the team never jelled. I was really confident in that team.

 

[NielsisGood]

They might have been young, but they were Kentucky young. NBA prospects across the roster, four starters returning from a championship team, HOF coach. It was almost a case of having too many guys - if we had only seven players or so and guys got steady playing time and could settle into their roles, things would have gone much smoother. Chemistry would have been better and development would not have been impeded.

It was the one UConn team I can remember that just wasn't into it. It looked like they didn't play hard at times and I rarely say that.

In hindsight, though, what a wasted opportunity. We essentially won a championship with 2012's B team. To not at least be in the mix that year was a huge failure.

They returned a lot of guys from the title team the year before, but the 1 guy they lost happened to be the best player in the country the year before. That team was still extremely young across the board and Shabazz hadn't even started the year before.

Kentucky was also young that year but they had a generational talent in Davis, which that UConn team did not have. Drummond is also the only guy from that team who's really established himself in the NBA.

I also personally think Calhoun would have retired after the 2011 title and only stayed the extra year in order to coach Drummond and what at the time looked like a loaded team.

 

[HooperScooper]

Weren't the chicks and the dudes both on the cover of SI's college basketball issue as pre-season favorites in '04?

Yes sir.

 

[Mots010]

The '06 team was really good. Winning Maui with a freshman Craig Austrie playing point was a great achievement. And they had a really, really good year in as strong a Big EAst as we had seen up to then. But the team was flawed. It didn't really have the single go to guy that we had when we won our four championships, nor did it have a second starting guard who could also play the point as we had the years we won the championship. But that didn't mean the way the season ended wasn't incredibly painful.

06 just couldn't defend well either. Marcus Williams couldn't guard a chair. Rashad and denham weren't great either. and for as big as we were, our big men would get scored on at will. Watching those 6-6 guys on George mason post them up one trip after another was deflating. We gave up a lot of points in that tournament. They had to outscore teams by the time march came around.

 

[willie99]

04 and 06

 

[bobbygt]

06 just couldn't defend well either. Marcus Williams couldn't guard a chair. Rashad and denham weren't great either. and for as big as we were, our big men would get scored on at will. Watching those 6-6 guys on George mason post them up one trip after another was deflating. We gave up a lot of points in that tournament. They had to outscore teams by the time march came around.

I think both at the time and in hindsight, it was obvious that team had some major flaws. The Albany game, then Washington. And although losing to GM was a kick in the goonies, I was sorta relieved.

With that said, I knew watching that tournament that I was going to be disappointed if they didn't win the whole thing.

Media hype, 3 regular season losses (OT to Cuse, vs #4 Nova, the wtf Novak game), #1 seed, Rudy and Marcus being AA candidates, and so on.

Uconn sorta felt like a machine at that point in the 2000s- not quite like UK and Duke now, but Uconn wasn't getting top 30 recruits, they were getting top 10 and top 5 guys like CV, Rudy, and Bynum. I actually remember surfing the UNC and Duke boards and I remember so many posters dreading Uconn winning another title.

So, it wasn't so much that the 2006 team should've won the thing, just that there were a lot of factors that influenced me to think that it was championship or bust.

 

[uconNYC]

Weren't we ranked preseason #1 in 2000 right after 1999 championship. We had everyone back other than Hamilton and the the Ajou Deng hype.

 

[joober jones]

2017-18. Scrappy will back me on this.

 

[the Q]

2006 and 2009 are two years that will forever be hard to get over. At least 1995 had that dominant UCLA team, same with 96 and Kentucky). But I'd say any time you're a 1 or a 2 seed you should be thinking title or bust.

2009 didn't start that way (frankly it seemed like it would be the UNC coronation tour) but by the time the tourney started UConn and Louisville were the 2 best teams...

...and both choked to that laughably less talented Mich St squad. Granted it was a home game, but looking at that MSU roster, that's an embarrassing loss.

And 2006....I just never want to even talk about 2006 ever again. 7 NBA players lose to a bunch of grocery baggers. I'm glad I had a double header that day and couldn't watch that abomination. That team was a giant waste of talent, and 2 first round picks letting something called a Will Thomas throw them around was terrible.

But Brown also should've taken that last ball to the rack like he did in the first OT.